 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ferrari Cars / July 2004C-6 in Motor Trend- Cover photo
So this appears to be officially released pictures of the C-6. See page 62. And the magazine front cover. Very reminiscent of both the new Dodge Viper, and of the Ferrari Maranello. In fact, if you have the magazine, look at page 40, the new Ferrari 612 Scaglietti ($250,000) and then at the C-6, which supposedly will come out somewhere near $44,000 according to the article. They've also got a Viper convertible at page 51, which allows a comparison of front light treatments. I was strongly considering saving for the oldest Ferrari F355 I could find, figuring I could find one in about a year for under $60,000 (maybe a 97?), and I was offered a 96 Viper for $32,000 with 8900 miles by a friend. I had a 99 C-5 Convertible, and I think both the Viper and the 355 are a bit more exotic, so used seemed like the way to go. But looking at the C-6, if it comes out at 400 hp and 385 ft lbs of torque, standard, for $44,000 new (and without the mark-ups they put on the C-5 when it started out), it certainly looks like the performance bargain of the century! Point....counterpoint? <<But looking at the C-6, if it comes out at 400 hp and 385 ft lbs of torque, standard, for $44,000 new (and without the mark-ups they put on the C-5 when it started out), it certainly looks like the performance bargain of the century! Point....counterpoint?>> Hard to argue with the bang for the buck of the Corvette. Only thing I can say is... it won't be a Ferrari. <g> C. > <<But looking at the C-6, if it comes out at 400 hp and 385 ft lbs of torque, > standard, for $44,000 new (and without the mark-ups they put on the C-5 when [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > C. That bothers me somewhat as well. I've never owned a Ferrari, although I've owned a C-5 Vette, and several Porsche 911s, a TR-4a, Datsun 2000, MGB, etc. etc. Ferrari still holds a huge mystic for me. Not a bad thing to ponder over while amassing cash for the next year or so. > Ferrari still holds a huge mystic for me. Well, mine is a bit small to hold a _huge_ mystic. Besides; I'd never let Uri Geller near my Ferrari ... he might bend the key. ;^) And, once you own them, the mystique of the marque is replaced by the mystery of them -- mysteries such as whatinhellswrong with the K-Jet or Marelli system, _this_ time. ;) -- Speaker for the D00d Why yes, I _am_ in a silly mood. (Must come from nine straight hours of Samurai films on TCM, 'till I start with the "I'm here, Sam's behind you: SamOrI" punchiness.) >>Ferrari still holds a huge mystic for me. > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > (Must come from nine straight hours of Samurai films on TCM, 'till I > start with the "I'm here, Sam's behind you: SamOrI" punchiness.) You know, IFC also has "Samurai Saturdays"; they usually show at least a couple. Last week I caught "Yojimbo" - one of the greats! MC > You know, IFC also has "Samurai Saturdays"; they usually show at > least a couple. Last week I caught "Yojimbo" - one of the greats! The greatest combo to come out of Japan, Akira Kurosawa & Toshiro Mifune! :) Got a bunch of their films lying around. Best Wishes Thomas *Bush-I-Do: The Ancient art of Gardening, battlecry: Bonzai!* > > You know, IFC also has "Samurai Saturdays"; they usually show at > > least a couple. Last week I caught "Yojimbo" - one of the greats! > > The greatest combo to come out of Japan, Akira Kurosawa & Toshiro > Mifune! :) Got a bunch of their films lying around. Yep, I've been watching. They seem to be sponsored to hype the new Warner film, "The Last Samurai". (Some "indie" channel, eh?) I wouldn't waste $7 on a film that needs that much promotion, but we do get to see some of the classics. Hmm. John Ford Western fan Akiro Kurosawa makes Samurai film "Yojimbo" which is then remade by Sergio Leone into the "Spaghetti Western", "A Fistful of Dollars". (Join me in a chorus of "It's a Small World After All"?) I still like "Sanjuro", despite it not being remade into a western. ;^) I was fairly impressed by "Samurai Rebellion", with Mifune as exec producer. But it was made by Kobayashi, not Kurosawa. I hope we get to see "Harakiri" before they decide they've hyped the new film enough. Alas, IFC's web site designers seem to think that it's a _good_ idea to hide the monthly channel schedule behind a bunch of broken javascript, rather than make it readily available for a fetch-bot. Heck, we wouldn't want people to know there was something worth watching on, would we? Go figure. -- Speaker for the D00d (Right to bear Kendu (bamboo) Swords?) > I was fairly impressed by "Samurai Rebellion", with Mifune as exec > producer. But it was made by Kobayashi, not Kurosawa. I hope we get Kayser Sozes laywer makes movies too? ;) Best Wishes Thomas *Verbal Kint rocks!* > > But it was made by Kobayashi, not Kurosawa. > > Kayser Sozes laywer makes movies too? ;) Oh. Try "Masaki Kobayashi" on your search engine. -- Speaker for the D00d Or "Kobayashi Masaki" for sites you might not have a font for. ;) > They seem to be sponsored to hype the new Warner film, "The Last > Samurai". (Some "indie" channel, eh?) Not only that, but Quentin Tarantino's grubby hands are all over the telecasts as well (think "Kill Bill"). Not that I particularly mind that, but yes ... none of that belongs on IFC. Almost makes me want to see more of the nauseating Jon Favreau "Dinner for Five" promos. Puke. MC > Very reminiscent of both the new Dodge Viper, and of the Ferrari Maranello. I thought the exact same thing. > In fact, if you have the magazine, look at page 40, the new Ferrari 612 > Scaglietti ($250,000) and then at the C-6, which supposedly will come out [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > when it started out), it certainly looks like the performance bargain of the > century A Ferrari is just more than numbers on a piece of paper. The Corvette may put out similar numbers to the older Ferrari, but the overall driving experience of a Corvette is seriously dull compared to the Italian stallion. If getting the most performance per dollar is your main criteria, than a C-6 has your name written on it. If you want a piece of automotive history, rolling artwork on wheels and the most vibrant noise machine on earth, look no further. > Point....counterpoint? Still a Corvette though, innit? Although the performance of the Corvettes have improved greatly, and the handling appaerntly even moreso, they're still a little naff, still got pushrod OHV V-8s instead of the sweeter twin cam multi-valve stuff that's been around oh for the last 80 years or so. Darn those new fangled gidgets Seymour. Ferrin commie plot. The Corvette IMHO lacks the subtleties, finesse, grace and elegance of modern Ferraris and really will never be in the same league until someone in Detroit "gets" it. I guess they bought their own advertising hype though... Oh, and there's the small issue of competition pedigree. Ferrari, Porsche, Maserati, Alfa, Lancia even Mazda, Nissan, Subaru, Toyota have excellent to fair records in real motorsport. Chev has to do more than race Nascar. Ciao Zak -- ======================================================================== http://www.carfolio.com/ Searchable database of 10 000+ car specs Auctioning motoring-related items at eBay? http://www.carfolio.com/ebay/ ======================================================================== > Chev has to do more than race Nascar. Corvette has had quite a year in sports car racing, actually. I believe they finished first in class in many races in the Rolex and Grand Am series races, over the Prodrive 550 Maranellos. They might have even taken the championship, I'm too lazy to click over and look. They've also done very well in GT racing in various other series as well. They high-finished 11th & 12th at Le Mans. It's not like they're not trying. MC >> Chev has to do more than race Nascar. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > also done very well in GT racing in various other series as well. They > high-finished 11th & 12th at Le Mans. It's not like they're not trying. Oh yeah, I forgot about that. It's a good start then... Ferrari won the championships I believe - both driver's & constructor's. (FIA GT) Not sure about IMSA. Ciao Zak -- ======================================================================== http://www.carfolio.com/ Searchable database of 10 000+ car specs Auctioning motoring-related items at eBay? http://www.carfolio.com/ebay/ ======================================================================== > Oh yeah, I forgot about that. It's a good start then... Ferrari won > the championships I believe - both driver's & constructor's. (FIA GT) > Not sure about IMSA. Damn your forgetting mind! I just went over to the Mozilla site. I LIKE what I see. I might email you privately about some of the ramifications of breaking the evil IE/OE grip on my PC. But it sure looks cool. MC > I just went over to the Mozilla site. I LIKE what I see. I might > email you privately about some of the ramifications of breaking the > evil IE/OE grip on my PC. But it sure looks cool. I find your lack of faith.. disturbing.. Best Wishes Thomas *Using a Jedi trick to choke MC for contemplating going non MS* >> I just went over to the Mozilla site. I LIKE what I see. I might >> email you privately about some of the ramifications of breaking the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Best Wishes > Thomas *Using a Jedi trick to choke MC for contemplating going non MS* Thomas, Thomas, Thomas ... I only started using IE a couple years ago when it became obvious that Netscape was dead. I hate Internet Explorer. Sorry about that. Hell, I've mumbled the word "Opera" several times in the last couple years. Besides, how "non-MS" can I possibly be when I'm still -and will still be - using XP? I'm not mentally tough enough to switch to Linux or some other such rebellion. MC >> I find your lack of faith.. disturbing.. >> Thomas *Using a Jedi trick to choke MC for contemplating going non >> MS* > > Thomas, Thomas, Thomas ... Hehe, so sue me for beeing a geek who just takes any opportunity to use SW or MP quotes ;) Best Wishes Thomas *Ni!* >>> Chev has to do more than race Nascar. >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >championships I believe - both driver's & constructor's. (FIA GT) Not >sure about IMSA. You're an imbecile; Ferrari have been chasing Corvettes for years. Yes, they, privateers really, took the FIA stuff this year, but not last year, or the year before or the year before that or... In fact Ferrari are only returning _next_ year after a 40-some-odd year _abdication_ from GT racing. ...About freaking time too, they've milked the GTO to death. > You're an imbecile; Ferrari have been chasing Corvettes for years. Let's not be so rude, now - it's a goddamned holiday. Zak's a good guy. Just because he didn't differentiate between factory and privateer - neither did I. You were just starting to show some manners, too ... MC >> You're an imbecile; Ferrari have been chasing Corvettes for years. > >Let's not be so rude, now - it's a goddamned holiday. Zak's a good guy. >Just because he didn't differentiate between factory and privateer - neither >did I. Not the point at all. Ferraris have not been 'kicking butt' in GT racing, they've had one limited successful year in a long long while. >You were just starting to show some manners, too ... I stand by my declaration; he was making "facts" up to fill in huge cognitive gaps, "facts" which are contradicted by both truth and history. What's manners got to with it? >>> You're an imbecile; Ferrari have been chasing Corvettes for years. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Not the point at all. Ferraris have not been 'kicking butt' in GT > racing, they've had one limited successful year in a long long while. Unlike Chev, who have had some limited success in a marginal racing series for the last few years eh? FIA GT is stareting to become what it should be (IMHO). However since the mid-eighties that formula of racing has been largely uninteresting and fairly uncontested, except for the VW-Audi conglomerate and some almost-sporty US crudmobiles (Vipers, Vettes etc). And the odd BMW. >>You were just starting to show some manners, too ... > > I stand by my declaration; he was making "facts" up to fill in huge > cognitive gaps, "facts" which are contradicted by both truth and > history. What's manners got to with it? f.ck you. Ferrari (with or without Fiat's help - I know not) decided to concentrate on F1 over the Sports/GT classes. That privateers in Ferraris "chased" Vettes means f.ck all - you simply cannot compare privateer efforts to works ones. Ferrari have more then the GTO to work with anyway. Where's Chev's GTO then? Nope, I thought not, doesn't even have one racing icon. You can bet your bottom dollar too that when Ferrari _do_ return to pukka Sports Racing classes, they'll not be aiming to emulate Chev... Ciao Zak -- ======================================================================== http://www.carfolio.com/ Searchable database of 10 000+ car specs Auctioning motoring-related items at eBay? http://www.carfolio.com/ebay/ ======================================================================== >>>> You're an imbecile; Ferrari have been chasing Corvettes for years. >>> [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >You can bet your bottom dollar too that when Ferrari _do_ return to pukka >Sports Racing classes, they'll not be aiming to emulate Chev... Learn a little history, sonny-boy; then come back and apologize, like a nice little spoiled reprobate. >Ciao ...Trying to pass yourself off as an Italian, too? Sad... You make up historical facts so you can shout "we're da best"... Pretending to involvement in a proud sporting tradition, then you pretend to a proud cultural tradition as well... How sad. >>f.ck you. Ferrari (with or without Fiat's help - I know not) decided to >>concentrate on F1 over the Sports/GT classes. That privateers in [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Learn a little history, sonny-boy; then come back and apologize, like a > nice little spoiled reprobate. For what? >>Ciao > > ...Trying to pass yourself off as an Italian, too? Where? When? > Sad... You make up historical facts so you can shout "we're da best"... > Pretending to involvement in a proud sporting tradition, then you > pretend to a proud cultural tradition as well... Please point out which facts I have made up. Go ahead. > How sad. Don't be so harsh on yourself. I can send you dozens of offers of pen1s elarge.ment or prescription dr.ugs - either or neither of which might help you. Ciao Zak -- ======================================================================== http://www.carfolio.com/ Searchable database of 10 000+ car specs Auctioning motoring-related items at eBay? http://www.carfolio.com/ebay/ ======================================================================== <<In fact Ferrari are only returning _next_ year after a 40-some-odd year _abdication_ from GT racing.>> Ferrari is not returning to GT racing next year. Maserati is. C. > <<In fact Ferrari are only returning _next_ year after a 40-some-odd > year _abdication_ from GT racing.>> > > Ferrari is not returning to GT racing next year. Maserati is. > > C. But they are making a factory team comeback in GTS, correct? My understanding is the 575 GTC was developed expressly for a full-factory effort ... MC >> <<In fact Ferrari are only returning _next_ year after a 40-some-odd >> year _abdication_ from GT racing.>> >> Ferrari is not returning to GT racing next year. Maserati is. Maserati is bringing their Trofeo series to the US. ...N'est pas? ...Can't hardly call that "GT racing". It's a high tech thrill ride, with a $150K E-ticket (double-d window dressing not included), and since the Trofeo cars are always rented, never owned; the bumper-car factor should make Ferrari Challenge look like real racing (and I have personally seen 360 "Challenge" cars in the air, four wheels off the ground, in the first turn at Montreal): The spare parts demand will be more than sufficient to subsidize the Quattroporte's price through its first four model years. >But they are making a factory team comeback in GTS, correct? My >understanding is the 575 GTC was developed expressly for a full-factory >effort ... Or is the "C" for "Cliente"? They have severed their "deal" with Pro Drive, haven't they? Butt-ugly car either way: Looks like a German tuner version. ...Or an AOL "Ferrerie 555-GT/Jota". <<Maserati is bringing their Trofeo series to the US. ...N'est pas? ...Can't hardly call that "GT racing".>> I wasn't referring to the Maserati Challenge when I said that Maserati is returning to GT racing. I was referring to Jean Todt's comments about Maserati returning to FIA competition in late 2004. <<It's a high tech thrill ride, with a $150K E-ticket (double-d window dressing not included)>> I am hardly a *double-d*, but I've had no complaints. <<since the Trofeo cars are always rented, never owned; the bumper-car factor should make Ferrari Challenge look like real racing>> There was indeed some *real* racing in Ferrari Challenge over the years. <<and I have personally seen 360 "Challenge" cars in the air, four wheels off the ground, in the first turn at Montreal>> Skippy for you. I've personally been sideways thru the dirt on the inside of the Corkscrew at Laguna in a 355 F1Challenge car. <<The spare parts demand will be more than sufficient to subsidize the Quattroporte's price through its first four model years.>> The talent level waivers in Challenge racing. They totaled 15 360s in the first year of competition in this country. They literally ran out of spare parts by the end of the year. From what I've been told, the 360 is quite easy to drive fast. It's just not that easy to handle at high speeds on uneven tracks. <<They have severed their "deal" with Pro Drive, haven't they?>> What *deal* do you think that ProDrive had with the Factory? The one where they get to buy parts at full retail value and are not only denied technical support, but are actively discouraged from privateer racing? <<Butt-ugly car either way: Looks like a German tuner version.>> It's a bit busy, but the only reason you claim that it looks *German* is that nothing else gets your panties in a bunch the way German cars do. C. ><<Maserati is bringing their Trofeo series to the US. ...N'est pas? >...Can't hardly call that "GT racing".>> >I wasn't referring to the Maserati Challenge when I said that Maserati is >returning to GT racing. I was referring to Jean Todt's comments about Maserati >returning to FIA competition in late 2004. I so don't want to do this... When did Todt say what about Maserati and FIA competition in 2004? ><<It's a high tech thrill ride, with a $150K E-ticket (double-d window dressing >not included)>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >There was indeed some *real* racing in Ferrari Challenge over the years. When the "series: allowed pro and semi-pro drivers? ><<and I have personally seen 360 "Challenge" cars in the air, four wheels off >the ground, in the first turn at Montreal>> > >Skippy for you. I've personally been sideways thru the dirt on the inside of >the Corkscrew at Laguna in a 355 F1Challenge car. I wasn't going for "I'm wonderful" points; I was pointing out how laughable Challenge is. Fendered cars in mid-air in the first turn of a road race... _That's_ talent! ><<The spare parts demand will be more than sufficient to subsidize the >Quattroporte's price through its first four model years.>> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >the end of the year. From what I've been told, the 360 is quite easy to drive >fast. It's just not that easy to handle at high speeds on uneven tracks. It's laughable. ><<They have severed their "deal" with Pro Drive, haven't they?>> > >What *deal* do you think that ProDrive had with the Factory? The one where they >get to buy parts at full retail value and are not only denied technical >support, but are actively discouraged from privateer racing? Double quotation marks around deal... ><<Butt-ugly car either way: Looks like a German tuner version.>> > >It's a bit busy, but the only reason you claim that it looks *German* is that >nothing else gets your panties in a bunch the way German cars do. I like several German cars just fine, panties aside; I simply do not like the current idiom for, you will note, objective reasons. And, on the subjective side; Koenig, et al., modified Pininfarina designs are aesthetic abominations: While appearing a Jota ripoff, the 575 GTC looks very Koenig, Sbarro even. That, of course, is mere opinion; while the micro-assited, driver-superfluous, corpulent nature of recent German cars is fact. <<I so don't want to do this... >> You one of those guys who hates to ask for directions too? <<When did Todt say what about Maserati and FIA competition in 2004?>> At Magny Cours in April of this year, Todt said that Maserati will be entering FIA competition late in 2004. Supposedly in something called a 6000GT based off the Enzo. <<When the "series: allowed pro and semi-pro drivers?>> The Challenge Series has always frowned on pro drivers, some guys about had a hissy fit when I wanted my coach to run in the *enduro* with me, but there have been some damn fine amateurs competing for years. Doc Earle never seems to have a problem finding his way around a track. <<I was pointing out how laughable Challenge is.>> Why? What's your beef with people spending their own money to beat the Hel out of their own cars? << Fendered cars in mid-air in the first turn of a road race... _That's_ talent!>> As I said, 360s are easy to drive fast, but not easy to handle at high speeds. It has to do with the aerodynamic design. It has been explained to me, but I am hardly the best at explaining such things to others. <<It's laughable.>> I don't find the total loss of 15 exotic cars to be in the slightest bit funny. <<Double quotation marks around deal...>> Which meant what exactly? Did you or did you not think that the Factory was working with ProDrive? What change were you referring to? <<And, on the subjective side; Koenig, et al., modified Pininfarina designs are aesthetic abominations: While appearing a Jota ripoff, the 575 GTC looks very Koenig, Sbarro even. That, of course, is mere opinion; while the micro-assited, driver-superfluous, corpulent nature of recent German cars is fact.>> You have never driven an M5, therefore, your opinion of them as touring sedans is meaningless to me next to that of someone who has had the pleasure. C. ><<I so don't want to do this... >> >You one of those guys who hates to ask for directions too? Hardly. ...I'm usually late as well. ><<When did Todt say what about Maserati and FIA competition in 2004?>> >At Magny Cours in April of this year, Todt said that Maserati will be entering >FIA competition late in 2004. Supposedly in something called a 6000GT based off >the Enzo. Any more than that? ><<When the "series: allowed pro and semi-pro drivers?>> >The Challenge Series has always frowned on pro drivers, some guys about had a >hissy fit when I wanted my coach to run in the *enduro* with me, but there have >been some damn fine amateurs competing for years. Doc Earle never seems to have >a problem finding his way around a track. At one point they banned pro drivers explicitly, no? ...And, for every Steve Earle their are five Jesse Jameses. ><<I was pointing out how laughable Challenge is.>> >Why? What's your beef with people spending their own money to beat the Hel out >of their own cars? You say it yourself, below*; ><< Fendered cars in mid-air in the first turn of a road race... _That's_ >talent!>> >As I said, 360s are easy to drive fast, but not easy to handle at high speeds. Turn one at Montreal is not a high speed corner. >It has to do with the aerodynamic design. It has been explained to me, but I am >hardly the best at explaining such things to others. Pitch/yaw sensitivity? ><<It's laughable.>> >I don't find the total loss of 15 exotic cars to be in the slightest bit funny. *... No, but the "talent" level is. Watching a Challenge race close-up is an occasion for crying or laughing, depending upon one's sensitivity and sense of irony. What the Challenge "drivers" do to the cars is lamentable. It may be their right, but it is wasteful, and vain, and ultimately laughable. And if you don't think the F1 team is laughing, when they notice at all... ><<Double quotation marks around deal...>> >Which meant what exactly? Did you or did you not think that the Factory was >working with ProDrive? What change were you referring to? The Prodrive "deal" was cosy without being truly supportive. It is now simply no more. ><<And, on the subjective side; Koenig, et al., modified Pininfarina designs >are aesthetic abominations: While appearing a Jota ripoff, the 575 GTC looks [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >You have never driven an M5, therefore, your opinion of them as touring sedans >is meaningless to me next to that of someone who has had the pleasure. I have also never claimed to driving cars I haven't; do you really mean to deny BMW, Audi and M-B, the German cars you claim get my panties in a bunch, have grown excessively corpulent, increasingly complex for complexity's sake, and are filled with gadgets and assists which can actually interfere with sporting driving? From the Maserati.com site: 4/26/03, Todt says: "The GT car will test for the first time around the end of the year, with a view to making its race debut in the second half of the 2004 season". The car: <fx=crickets> End of year testing: <fx=crickets> Photos? Nothing you couldn't do, and which hasn't been done, with PhotoShop. (ferrarichat.com) Will a Ferrari v-12 really be re-badged as a Maserati? ...Before Ferrari Spa is bought by British Leyland? Will they fit a 6litre v-8 to the Enzo's tub? Will Ferrari really make a "Merak" version of the Enzo? Is that sound you hear, Enzo Ferrari hitting the Stygian rev limiter? Dale "Friggin" Carnegie wrote: > ...Before Ferrari Spa is bought by British Leyland? Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat??? Elaborate? <putting on his admittedly ill-fitting Sherlock hat and off to Google> MC >Dale "Friggin" Carnegie wrote: >> ...Before Ferrari Spa is bought by British Leyland? >Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat??? Elaborate? ><putting on his admittedly ill-fitting Sherlock hat and off to Google> Settle down, Sherlock; just a little hyperbole, spurred by the ever inventful Euro press ...or haven't you heard the "Ferrari to be bought by [Jacques Chocolatiere, Nigel's Nicknacks or Audi/VW]" rumors before? (I don't imagine B-L even exists anymore, the British auto industry being a wholly owned subsidiary of Germany, Inc., or German-American subsidiaries.) > From the Maserati.com site: > 4/26/03, Todt says: "The GT car will test for the first time around [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Will a Ferrari v-12 really be re-badged as a Maserati? It's been in the works for a while. See: http://www.ferrariownersclub.co.uk/happenings/2003/july/maserati_enzo/text.asp  SignatureMike Hanson -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= www.scaleautosport.com >> From the Maserati.com site: >> 4/26/03, Todt says: "The GT car will test for the first time around [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >It's been in the works for a while. See: >http://www.ferrariownersclub.co.uk/happenings/2003/july/maserati_enzo/text.asp "Leans heavily"?! That's just an Enzo with a wing (and some sort of rear-mounted apparatus). I'm still unconvinced the next genuine Maserati racing effort will be so obviously and blatantly an extant Ferrari derivative. How is that different from sticking a Trident on the nose of a 575? Wouldn't that ultimately hurt Maserati and Ferrari's reputations? Is the lack of any current news indicative of Ferrari-Maserati reaching just that conclusion? > >> From the Maserati.com site: > "Leans heavily"?! That's just an Enzo with a wing (and some sort of [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > so obviously and blatantly an extant Ferrari derivative. How is that > different from sticking a Trident on the nose of a 575? What I've read is that while Ferrari will stick with Pininfarina as a design house, Maserati will not necessarily use them. The new Maser GT will supposedly be based on the Enzo chassis but the bodywork will be very different. Obviously, that's all hearsay. A more solid "rumor" is a Maserati SUV based on the VW Toureg. I find that more disturbing than a rebodied Enzo... Maserati and Audi are trading technology, with Maser getting the SUV and VW getting the Quattroporte platform to use in their ongoing "upscale" efforts. That's also where a lot of the rumor about a potential VW takeover of Ferrari comes from. SignatureMike Hanson -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= www.scaleautosport.com >> >> From the Maserati.com site: >> "Leans heavily"?! That's just an Enzo with a wing (and some sort of [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >supposedly be based on the Enzo chassis but the bodywork will be very >different. Obviously, that's all hearsay. It doesn't make sense. >A more solid "rumor" is a Maserati SUV based on the VW Toureg. I find that >more disturbing than a rebodied Enzo... Maserati and Audi are trading >technology, with Maser getting the SUV and VW getting the Quattroporte >platform to use in their ongoing "upscale" efforts. Is this documented anywhere? Maserati has shown an SUV long before the Audi deal, so while I can see them wanting Toureg running gear, why would VW want the Quattroporte, having already the A8/Phaeton twins? >That's also where a lot >of the rumor about a potential VW takeover of Ferrari comes from. ...Never happen. Don't forget Ferrari-Maserati are not part of FIAT Auto. <<It doesn't make sense.>> It makes perfect sense. Ferrari has no need to expand its racing effort. They sell exactly as many Ferraris as they want to. OTOH, Maserati has been limping for many yrs. Advertising via racing is what they do, so why not do for Maserati what they did for Ferrari? Only they don't have a race ready Maser sitting around. What to do? What to do? Using one chassis to build multiple cars is commonplace in the automotive world. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a rebadged Enzo. C. > <<It doesn't make sense.>> > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > cars is commonplace in the automotive world. I wouldn't be at all surprised to > see a rebadged Enzo. This is true. Heck, even Ferrari has used the same/similar chassis for different models over the years.. As they now own the Maserati brand, it kinda makes sense that they might economize in that way. And since the Enzo chassis is already much of the way to being race-worthy, it was likely an easy leap of logic. If it does happen, I for one am very interested in the styling, as Maser has the opportunity to make a splash. SignatureMike Hanson -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= www.scaleautosport.com >> <<It doesn't make sense.>> >> It makes perfect sense. Ferrari has no need to expand its racing effort. They [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >This is true. Heck, even Ferrari has used the same/similar chassis for >different models over the years.. Not relevant; they used very similar chassis within mechanically identical families of cars having coachbuilding variations, they did not build straight-6 variants of the 250 GT/E and call it a Lagonda, or a flat-6 engined Dino Boxer Berlinetta. >As they now own the Maserati brand, it >kinda makes sense that they might economize in that way. And since the Enzo >chassis is already much of the way to being race-worthy, it was likely an >easy leap of logic. Not if you factor in dilution of the Ferrari brand, which I believe to be a real and significant effect of merely rebadging Ferraris as Maseratis. If that comes to pass, cheer for a VW take over; they can then blend them all into German engineered and designed FerraMaserGhinis... The ultimate in homogenization. ...With diesel engines, no doubt. >If it does happen, I for one am very interested in the styling, as Maser has >the opportunity to make a splash. One would think the long overdue Coupe and Spider redesigns would be their perfect opportunity. The next mid-engined Maserati should favor the Bora, not the Enzo, as its gene pool: Otherwise they'll just be making 'fussy Eye-tie Camaros and Firebirds'. > >This is true. Heck, even Ferrari has used the same/similar chassis for > >different models over the years.. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > not build straight-6 variants of the 250 GT/E and call it a Lagonda, > or a flat-6 engined Dino Boxer Berlinetta. The original Testarossa first used a 4-cylinder and later that great V12. So there is a precedent for different engines in essentially the same chassis. But I grant you the point that it's not a completely different "product line." However, I'm not sure it's a given that a Maser racer will use the Ferrari V12. In fact I doubt that they will. They are probably only using the chassis. Different engine (probably the 4.2 V8?) and bodywork. I really don't have a problem with Ferrari and Maserati working together. It's a better match than VW and Lamborghini, imo. At least Ferrari and Maserati have similar racing history, they both have a great heritage. I was glad that Ferrari picked them up vs., say, a Daimler or GM. I guess time will tell... SignatureMike Hanson -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= www.scaleautosport.com ><<It doesn't make sense.>> >It makes perfect sense. Ferrari has no need to expand its racing effort. They >sell exactly as many Ferraris as they want to. OTOH, Maserati has been limping >for many yrs. Advertising via racing is what they do, so why not do for >Maserati what they did for Ferrari? Makes sense up to here. >Only they don't have a race ready Maser >sitting around. What to do? What to do? Using one chassis to build multiple >cars is commonplace in the automotive world. You lose me here; we are not talking General Motors. >I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a rebadged Enzo. I will. Which engine? I ask again does anyone really think a rebadged Enzo motor is feasible from a marketing standpoint? Is a "Merak-ed" Enzo with a Maserati derived v-8 any better? They have the resources to clean sheet a Maserati GT racer; why sully the gold-chips? If they do just recast the bodywork softer, change the Cavalinos to Tridents, throw in a Cartier clock and squishy carpeting, knock the Price down to 33% off, and build another 1,000 units; will not the Enzo 399 rise in outrage and class warfare? Will Ferrari ever again be able to build an ultra technology limited edition, if they set a precedent that anything can be re-made into a Maserati knockoff, if it's just as simple as selling a Pontiac Sunbird as a Cadillac by adding leather and deep pile carpeting? This sort of thing happens all the time at the low end of the market; I don't believe, and I realize Audi, Mercedes and BMW have bet the other way, that it will work at the pointy end. But, Ferrari doesn't have the deep pockets that the German's do, and rather than gain from an association with betters, they have all to lose by cheapening their premier line, advertising exigencies be damned Dale "Friggin" Carnegie wrote: > I will. > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > an association with betters, they have all to lose by cheapening their > premier line, advertising exigencies be damned Very well said. It is indeed very tiring to see all the endless model derivatives amongst carmakers' various lines. It may be nice and convenient for the manufacturer but I think a lot of car fans retch at the sight of it all. MC > >A more solid "rumor" is a Maserati SUV based on the VW Toureg. I find that > >more disturbing than a rebodied Enzo... Maserati and Audi are trading [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > ...Never happen. Don't forget Ferrari-Maserati are not part of FIAT > Auto. I would hope that nothing happens between VW and Ferrari. If folks though them buying Bentley was scandalous.... As for the SUV background: http://www.ferrariownersclub.co.uk/happenings/2003/september/vw_ferrari.asp SignatureMike Hanson -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= www.scaleautosport.com >As for the SUV background: >http://www.ferrariownersclub.co.uk/happenings/2003/september/vw_ferrari.asp I don't understand why VW would want a contemporaneous floor plan when the Phaeton/A8 craps out. "Dale "Friggin" Carnegie" <dc@dale-carnegie.com> wrote > It's a high tech thrill ride, with a $150K E-ticket (double-d window > dressing not included) Huh? What on earth is "double-d window dressing" ? -Paul > "Dale "Friggin" Carnegie" <dc@dale-carnegie.com> wrote > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > -Paul Errr, think umbrella girls in MotoGP. -Matt- "Or just say 'women with large breasts'..." Dale "Friggin" Carnegie wrote: > They have severed their "deal" with Pro Drive, haven't they? > > Butt-ugly car either way: Looks like a German tuner version. > > ...Or an AOL "Ferrerie 555-GT/Jota". OK f.ck face - I waited long enough. You are Mikal, we all know it. You don't know sh.t about cars, all you like to do is insult people here, and I for one think perhaps it's time again to "out" you so those of use geographically close enough to you can give you the royal motherf..king thumping you deserve. SHUT THE f.ck UP, PRICK. MC > You are Mikal, we all know it. Do we? I mean the guy has many of the attributes, but beneath the brutishness, the pomposity and the jealous, sexist, 'car-as-a-replacement-for-my-penis' stuff, he can at least spell, which Mikal never could master. Anyway, Mikal might be a complete w.nker, but he'd have to have balls of steel to come back in here. Notwithstanding the above, well said, Mikey ;-) *CIAO* MCPD >Dale "Friggin" Carnegie wrote: >> They have severed their "deal" with Pro Drive, haven't they? >> Butt-ugly car either way: Looks like a German tuner version. >> ...Or an AOL "Ferrerie 555-GT/Jota". >> >OK f.ck face - I waited long enough. You are Mikal, we all know it. I am not. I am Mark. >You don't know sh.t about cars, I do. Quite a bit in fact. Joy of a misspent youth. >all you like to do is insult people here, I do not. In fact, I would rather not; I do not suffer fools gladly however. I'm sorry I had to put a boot up your buddy's butt, but he was behaving as an a.s. "Corvettes suck, Ferrari's great" is hardly a noteworthy articulation. >and I for one think perhaps it's time again to "out" you so those >of use geographically close enough to you can give you the royal >motherf..king thumping you deserve. I'm guessing that's not as good thing as it sounds? >SHUT THE f.ck UP, PRICK. Nope. Not now, not ever. I'm a longtime Ferrari fan, since ~1966; and against a long and storied history and body of work, I think the 575 GTC looks* amateurish and ugly, derivative of a much copied Lamborghini show car and evocative of the very same kit-crap you yourself so vociferously deride. You do not have to agree; but you have no right to squelch opinions which you don't formulate. * If it performs, all will be forgiven, of course. Dale "Friggin" Carnegie wrote: > I am not. I am Mark. Good Lord. You finally got me, with a moniker that I didn't immediately attach to you. And I dumped on you as my acknowledgement. If you're that Mark, sorry man. Why didn't you answer my Junior Wells email? Your jousting in here is actually entertaining to me, anyway, and I know that you are not so evil that you would continue to slice and dice the folks here just for the sake of slicin' and dicin'. I remember when I first "joined" this little community, you were one of the first posters with whom I went to war. And you never backed down. Comparing you to Mikal is kind of insult, so I have to apologize. Dale "Friggin" Carnegie ... I can't believe I didn't see through that one. MCPD is right, Mikal can't spell or enunciate to save his pathetic life. DOH! MC (I'm kind of hypomanic right now anyway, so I'm not surprised I spilled like that. Medications suck ...) >Dale "Friggin" Carnegie wrote: >> I am not. I am Mark. >Good Lord. >You finally got me, with a moniker that I didn't immediately attach to >you. You didn't notice the switch right/soon after you chastised me for a lack of manners? >And I dumped on you as my acknowledgement. >If you're that Mark, sorry man. Why didn't you answer my Junior Wells >email? ...I've been busy? I've been busy being ill? I'm a long way behind on email, and you did seem to get Mozilla hammered out? >Your jousting in here is actually entertaining to me, anyway, and I know >that you are not so evil that you would continue to slice and dice the >folks here just for the sake of slicin' and dicin'. I remember when I >first "joined" this little community, you were one of the first posters >with whom I went to war. And you never backed down. Hey, fun is fun, and spirited debate can be very fun; but we all should remember the common idea is "Ferrari". ...My preference is without the excessive genuflecting and bowing and scraping by the proles, and a good bit more F1. ...Some day they may properly return to sports and GT racing and all will be well the world. >Comparing you to Mikal is kind of insult, so I have to apologize. > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >(I'm kind of hypomanic right now anyway, so I'm not surprised I spilled >like that. Medications suck ...) No kidding... No kidding. ...What was I talking about? <<I'm sorry I had to put a boot up your buddy's butt, but he was behaving as an a.s. "Corvettes suck, Ferrari's great" is hardly a noteworthy articulation.>> Hardly any less *noteworthy* than that *BMWs suck, Ferraris great* nonsense. Or *Nissans suck...*. <<You do not have to agree; but you have no right to squelch opinions which you don't formulate.>> But you'll keep trying? C. ><<I'm sorry I had to put a boot up your buddy's butt, but he was behaving as an >a.s. "Corvettes suck, Ferrari's great" is hardly a noteworthy articulation.>> > >Hardly any less *noteworthy* than that *BMWs suck, Ferraris great* nonsense. Or >*Nissans suck...*. Indeed. Now who's done that? ><<You do not have to agree; but you have no right to squelch opinions which you >don't formulate.>> > >But you'll keep trying? Cheep, rather cheep... <<Indeed. Now who's done that?>> No one of any importance around here. C. ><<Indeed. Now who's done that?>> > >No one of any importance around here. Oh, but isn't that precious... <<But they are making a factory team comeback in GTS, correct? My understanding is the 575 GTC was developed expressly for a full-factory effort ...>> I know that at least one privateer is planning on running two 575 GTCs next year, but I haven't heard that the Factory is. C. > <<But they are making a factory team comeback in GTS, correct? My > understanding is the 575 GTC was developed expressly for a full-factory effort [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > C. Hmmm .. the very first announcement I read about the 575 GTC was that it was being developed by the factory for a factory team. Maybe I'm wrong; as we all know I often am. MC <<Hmmm .. the very first announcement I read about the 575 GTC was that it was being developed by the factory for a factory team. >> Perhaps the Factory planned on a works team, but changed their minds. Perhaps the Factory will be supporting the privateer as Ford supports our program. That would be leaps and bounds above the cold shoulder that they've turned to privateers in recent years. C. :::who's not bitter at all::: > <<In fact Ferrari are only returning _next_ year after a 40-some-odd year > _abdication_ from GT racing.>> > > Ferrari is not returning to GT racing next year. Maserati is. Didn't somebody post a picture of the Maserati version of the "Enzo" getting prepped for GT racing? Was a cool looking flat-black number, iirc. Oh yeah, that picture on the front of Motor Trend is a computer simulation. The "real deal" can be found on the AutoWeek web site, though. Somebody caught the new C6 posing for some advertising pics. This whole argument tickles the hell outta me. Personally, I'm just a sports car junkie. I am particularly passionate about the red cars from Italy (Ferrari, Maserati, and hey, did you see that new Alfa concept, whoohoo!). But I like the Corvettes just fine, thanks. Also the new Ford GT, the Mustang, and even a Porsche here and there. SignatureMike Hanson -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= www.scaleautosport.com > > Point....counterpoint? > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Zak Actually, Corvette faired well in racing against Ferrari this year. But I'm not really equating racing with street car usage. If I could afford one, I'd buy the 2003 Ferrari 360 Spyder, in standard stick, not the F1 paddles, in a heart beat. But reality keeps my exotic car fantasies in the $30,000 to $70,000 range. I figure that puts me into 97 F355i territory, or Viper, or Vette. So using money as a criteria, I'm really comparing a C-6 405 HP Vette against a 97 F355, (and a coupe at that, since I think the Spyders are going for more). <<The Corvette IMHO lacks the subtleties, finesse, grace and elegance of modern Ferraris and really will never be in the same league until someone in Detroit "gets" it. I guess they bought their own advertising hype though...>> What *hype*? The Corvette is a great sports car. It doesn't claim to be an exotic car like the Ferrari. That being said, I think that they've refined them somewhat over the years. I remember when my sister got one back in the early 90s, I was pretty surprised to find the same cheap a.s seat belts in her $30,000 car that I remembered from dad's '70-something Grand Prix that he had when I was a kid. They've gotten better since then. <<Toyota have excellent to fair records in real motorsport. Chev has to do more than race Nascar.>> Apparently you have not been following international sports car racing in the past few yrs. <<Oh yeah, I forgot about that. It's a good start then... Ferrari won the championships I believe - both driver's & constructor's. (FIA GT) Not sure about IMSA.>> In ALMS, Corvette won Constructor's and Ron Fellows and Johnny O'Connell, the Corvette drivers, shared the Driver's Championship. C. > <<The Corvette IMHO lacks the subtleties, finesse, grace and elegance of > modern Ferraris and really will never be in the same league until [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > What *hype*? The Corvette is a great sports car. It doesn't claim to be > an exotic car like the Ferrari. [snip] From GM's 2004 Corvette model information: "...definitive street-legal sports car..." - referring of course to the Corvette. Hype enough? Ciao Zak -- ======================================================================== http://www.carfolio.com/ Searchable database of 10 000+ car specs Auctioning motoring-related items at eBay? http://www.carfolio.com/ebay/ ======================================================================== >> <<The Corvette IMHO lacks the subtleties, finesse, grace and elegance >> of modern Ferraris and really will never be in the same league until [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > From GM's 2004 Corvette model information: "...definitive street-legal > sports car..." - referring of course to the Corvette. Hype enough? And in the same release, they claim the Corvette has had 2 consecutive "Le Mans victories". Not class wins, but "Le Mans victories". Wonder how Audi & Bentley feel about that? Ciao Zak -- ======================================================================== http://www.carfolio.com/ Searchable database of 10 000+ car specs Auctioning motoring-related items at eBay? http://www.carfolio.com/ebay/ ======================================================================== >>> <<The Corvette IMHO lacks the subtleties, finesse, grace and elegance >>> of modern Ferraris and really will never be in the same league until [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> From GM's 2004 Corvette model information: "...definitive street-legal >> sports car..." - referring of course to the Corvette. Hype enough? Why do you feel you need to rubbish the Corvette? Just which Ferrari do you own, and why do you think that a possession entitles you to assume such laughable "class superiority"? >And in the same release, they claim the Corvette has had 2 consecutive >"Le Mans victories". Not class wins, but "Le Mans victories". Do they say overall wins? No... In their class they do indeed have two consecutive Le Mans victories, and as long as they don't say overall wins they're fine saying 'two consecutive Le Mans victories'. >Wonder how Audi & Bentley feel about that? I'm guessing Bentley feels just like a green-painted Audi, and neither care a fuzzy rat's a.s what the lesser classes do or say. >Ciao ...Fraud. "Dale "Friggin" Carnegie" <dc@dale-carnegie.com> wrote in message . > >Wonder how Audi & Bentley feel about that? > > I'm guessing Bentley feels just like a green-painted Audi, and neither > care a fuzzy rat's a.s what the lesser classes do or say. You came across like a jackass too, in some parts, but I gotta admit that one made me snicker. -Matt- "It's n'est-ce pas, n'est-ce pas?" >"Dale "Friggin" Carnegie" <dc@dale-carnegie.com> wrote in message . >> >Wonder how Audi & Bentley feel about that? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >You came across like a jackass too, in some parts, Yes, but I'm a righteous jackass; I'm not merely claiming virtue for specious xenophobic reasons. >but I gotta admit that one made me snicker. > >-Matt- "It's n'est-ce pas, n'est-ce pas?" Who knows... I studied Russian.... I had my doubts; Google OKed "n'est pas". >>>> <<The Corvette IMHO lacks the subtleties, finesse, grace and elegance >>>> of modern Ferraris and really will never be in the same league until [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Why do you feel you need to rubbish the Corvette? I was asked for an example of the "hype". > Just which Ferrari do you own, and why do you think that a possession > entitles you to assume such laughable "class superiority"? I do not own a Ferrari. Does that entitle me to no opinion on these matters then? >>And in the same release, they claim the Corvette has had 2 consecutive >>"Le Mans victories". Not class wins, but "Le Mans victories". > > Do they say overall wins? No... Come on... >>Wonder how Audi & Bentley feel about that? > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > ...Fraud. Whatever. Ciao Zak -- ======================================================================== http://www.carfolio.com/ Searchable database of 10 000+ car specs Auctioning motoring-related items at eBay? http://www.carfolio.com/ebay/ ======================================================================== <<Just which Ferrari do you own, and why do you think that a possession entitles you to assume such laughable "class superiority"?>> Why do you assume that anyone here owns a Ferrari? Why would one need to own a Ferrari in order to have an opinion about Corvette? Or any car? <<Do they say overall wins? No... In their class they do indeed have two consecutive Le Mans victories, and as long as they don't say overall wins they're fine saying 'two consecutive Le Mans victories'.>> Indeed. <<...Fraud.>> Pompous a.s. C. ><<Just which Ferrari do you own, and why do you think that a possession >entitles you to assume such laughable "class superiority"?>> > >Why do you assume that anyone here owns a Ferrari? I do not. >Why would one need to own a >Ferrari in order to have an opinion about Corvette? Or any car? One needn't. Hardly my point; which was questioning why the lad needed to trash Corvette, and particularly their recent racing record, in order to bolster his affection and identification with Ferrari, whose GT racing record had been embarrassingly spotty for decades. ><<Do they say overall wins? No... In their class they do indeed have two >consecutive Le Mans victories, and as long as they don't say overall wins [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >Pompous a.s. ...I've been called worse, and with greater justification. My news server seems to be dropping posts, so I'll respond to this one... > Hardly my point; which was questioning why the lad needed to trash > Corvette, and particularly their recent racing record, in order to > bolster his affection and identification with Ferrari, whose GT racing > record had been embarrassingly spotty for decades. They weren't exactly doing nothing you understand m'laaitjie (Afrikaans for lad, since I can), they were concentrating on Formula One. Still racing, still highly competitive, still (sometimes) winning. I don't think I was trashing the Corvettes either - at least not initially, merely wondering how one could even begin to compare a Corvette to a Ferrari. It's not just the pedigre of the marque, it's the fact that one is a shining example of engineering and design, whilst the other seems to have been lost in a time-warp of sorts; the one is a genuine sports car, the other just has those aspirations. The Corvette _has_ improved recently, no denying that, but it is hardly cutting-edge stuff. A little crude, if you like. Chev have taken 50 years to get the 'Vette where it is today, and it's still frankly not terribly impressive to me. Ciao Zak -- ======================================================================== http://www.carfolio.com/ Searchable database of 10 000+ car specs Auctioning motoring-related items at eBay? http://www.carfolio.com/ebay/ ======================================================================== << I don't think I was trashing the Corvettes either - at least not initially, merely wondering how one could even begin to compare a Corvette to a Ferrari.>> Nobody was. The OP was comparing owning a Vette to owning a Ferrari. <<the one is a genuine sports car, the other just has those aspirations.>> Corvette is a helluva sports car. Ferrari builds exotic cars. <<The Corvette _has_ improved recently, no denying that, but it is hardly cutting-edge stuff. A little crude, if you like.>> Pay attention... Corvette is not Ferrari. And they're not trying to be. <<Chev have taken 50 years to get the 'Vette where it is today, and it's still frankly not terribly impressive to me.>> I'm sure they're crushed. C. > << I don't think I was trashing the Corvettes either - at least not initially, > merely wondering how one could even begin to compare a Corvette to a Ferrari.>> > > Nobody was. The OP was comparing owning a Vette to owning a Ferrari. I believe that I was the original poster. I was/am/will be debating between an older F355i Ferrari, or next year's 2005 model year C-6 Corvette. I've owned many "sport" cars including Datsun 2000, MGB, Triumph 4, Jag XKE, Porsche 911, and Corvette C-5. I've driven a few Ferraris, including 308 Quattrovalve, Mondial, Dino, 512 Boxer, and was recently a passenger in an 02 360 Spyder. I have always wanted a Ferrari, but found them to be too expensive to purchase, for my "disposable income" and own and operate. I was originally looking at a Testarossa, as those have come down to a price I could afford, but I noticed that the F355s were also starting to drop into the 75,000 or so, range. Up against that is the brand new Corvette C-6, which looks more exotic than past versions. My C-5 convertible was a good handling car, that also seemed to be well put together. At the end of my lease I turned it back in, but I like the looks of the new one. If money were not an issue, and I could keep my daily drive (99 Mercedes S-420, bought as a lease return), I'd either like a Testarossa, and a personal mechanic, or on 03 360 Spyder. Unfortunately, money is an issue, so I was comparing the incredible "bang for the buck" that the new C-6, allegedly 405 horsepower with 400 ft lbs of torque, will present for under $50,000 new, with warranty, against the more exotic looks and sounds of the lower horsepower and torque, but better suspended F355 Ferrari (circa 95-97). The Ferrari hasn't dropped quite far enough for my wallet, but I think it will by the time the C-6 hits the streets. From there, there was a discussion of who has done what in racing. When I was interested in racing, it was on motorcycles. If you want a thrill, any motorcycle will beat most cars, most places. I've owned Ducatis (the Ferrari of motorcycles, and Hondas (the Honda of motorcycles) and so on. Loads of fun, but too many broken bones. So for me, the racing aspect of either professionals, or what I could do, is far less important than the visceral thrill of owning and driving one of these cars. I've concluded that if I can keep my daily driver AND afford a sports car, I'll go with the Ferrari. If the sportscar is going to become my daily driver, or if I don't have enough money to both buy and properly maintaint a Ferrari, I'll buy the Corvette. I can't imagine that owning either one of these two fine marques would be anything but fun. And if you want to measure, safe/secure/duller than a stone against "exotic", try taking my 99 Mercedes S420 around a few corners. My WINDOWS weigh more than either the Vette or the Ferrari. Wonderful cruiser, but dull, dull, dull. On the other hand, I think this vehicle could see 300,000 miles without much of a sweat. Doubt I'll ever see that on a Ferrari or Corvette odometer. ( ;-) >>> <<The Corvette IMHO lacks the subtleties, finesse, grace and elegance >>> of modern Ferraris and really will never be in the same league until [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] >"Le Mans victories". Not class wins, but "Le Mans victories". Wonder how >Audi & Bentley feel about that? You can bet when or if Ferrari ever win Le Mans again they will trumpet their class win just as loudly and widely as their F1 championships. Here's an extra credit question for you, Skippy: When was Ferrari's last win at Le Mans. and was it an overall or a class victory? <<From GM's 2004 Corvette model information: "...definitive street-legal sports car..." - referring of course to the Corvette. Hype enough?>> Hardly. What part are you objecting to? Where in that quote do they compare themselves to Ferrari? Which is what you initially inferred and then slammed them for. <<And in the same release, they claim the Corvette has had 2 consecutive "Le Mans victories". Not class wins, but "Le Mans victories".>> They did win at Le Mans. Twice. They don't claim overall victories. You're really reaching here. This is simple advertising. You claimed *hype*. Do you see no distinction? C. > So this appears to be officially released pictures of the C-6. See > page 62. And the magazine front cover. > > Very reminiscent of both the new Dodge Viper, and of the Ferrari > Maranello. I didn't see a single touch of Maranello in it. Some writers have seen a little 360 Modena in it, and I didn't see that either. The shot I saw was in an email publication called Auto Spies, and it was a gorgeous dark copper color. I have never had anything against Vettes, and it looks like a very fine car to me. I wonder what Mallett or Lingenfelter will do to it! MC > So this appears to be officially released pictures of the C-6. See > page 62. And the magazine front cover. > > Very reminiscent of both the new Dodge Viper, and of the Ferrari > Maranello. Now go to Motor Trend's web site and check out the Corvette Moray concept car - THAT is an Italian/Chevy style hybrid that kicks some serious a.s. It would be nice if they made it. Am I the only one who cannot f.cking stand the new style of online ads now that creep over the site you're looking at, sometimes with shock-to-the-system sound? They give you this tiny little "Close" X, and that's it. I hate those goddamned things. I wonder if a pop-up blocker will kill them, probably not. I've never needed one and I didn't want to start using one. Damn the web advertising industry to hell for those things. MC > Am I the only one who cannot f.cking stand the new style of online ads > now that creep over the site you're looking at, sometimes with [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > didn't want to start using one. Damn the web advertising industry to > hell for those things. Wander over to http://www.mozilla.org and grab either Mozilla 1.5 or the latest Firebird - by default they block popups but you can override them on a per-site basis. Works a charm. You'll have to reinstall your Flash and other plugins (probably - I never bother). HTH Ciao Zak -- ======================================================================== http://www.carfolio.com/ Searchable database of 10 000+ car specs Auctioning motoring-related items at eBay? http://www.carfolio.com/ebay/ ======================================================================== > Wander over to http://www.mozilla.org and grab either Mozilla 1.5 or > the latest Firebird - by default they block popups but you can > override them on a per-site basis. Works a charm. You'll have to > reinstall your Flash and other plugins (probably - I never bother). Every time I try to "wander" over to sites like that I get this weird pull ... the letters "MS" and "OE 6" appear in glowing orange script on the backs of my hands ... I sweat ... and then I go do something else. Maybe this time I'll succeed. Browser changes, one of the great challenges in life. And I was a Netscape honk forever until the great AOL plunder (well, from v 2.0 until Communicator 4.8 anyway) . I still want to kick Steve Case's a.s and feed him to a Venus flytrap or a pitcher plant. MC >> Wander over to http://www.mozilla.org and grab either Mozilla 1.5 or >> the latest Firebird - by default they block popups but you can [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >2.0 until Communicator 4.8 anyway) . I still want to kick Steve Case's a.s >and feed him to a Venus flytrap or a pitcher plant. Get Mozilla; you won't look back. > Am I the only one who cannot f.cking stand the new style of online ads now > that creep over the site you're looking at, sometimes with [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > start using one. Damn the web advertising industry to hell for those > things. My pop up blocker didn't work at the site you sent me to. It does help generally. You're not the only one who hates intrusive pop-ups. You could try Mozilla. ( www.mozilla.org ) You can filter Pop-up's, auxilary windows , Ad's from "external servers" and animated ads can be locked down plus it's free. >>Am I the only one who cannot f.cking sta |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message